Citizen Engagement in Smart Cities

D1.16 Report on Innovative Citizen Engagement Strategies

REMOURBAN - GA No. 646511

Extract from REMOURBAN (REgeneration MOdel for accelerating smart URBAN transformation) deliverable 1.16 ‘Report on Innovative Citizen Engagement Strategies’

In this document, you will find an overview of:

• Smart city and energy efficiency related citizen engagement

• Identified levels of citizen engagement

• Practical examples, tips and tools for each level

• Existing frameworks for citizen engagement

• Future perspectives

Content by Alec Walker-Love, [email protected], twitter: @ac_wlove

Part of the work presented in this paper is based on the research conducted within the project “Regeneration Model for Accelerating the Smart Urban Transformation – REMOURBAN”, which has received funding from the European Union Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (H2020/2014-2020) under Grant Agreement no. 646511.

Particular thanks to:

youris.com, [email protected], REMOURBAN partner contracted for D1.16

Christelle Degard, AREBS, City of Seraing, Belgium

István Nagy, Miskolc Holding Plc. Miskolc, Hungary

Expert witness testimonials and sources



Table of Content

1 Development of a Model for Citizens and Consumers Engagement ...................................... 3 Building best practice: expert views and experience from Europe and beyond in 1.1

citizen engagement ............................................................................................................. 71.1.1 Inform and consult .................................................................................................. 81.1.2 Include and collaborate ........................................................................................ 121.1.3 Empower and co-create ....................................................................................... 161.1.4 Evaluating engagement and social acceptance ................................................... 25

Better understanding and targeting the citizens we engage with ...................................... 311.2

1.2.1 Segmenting actors within the community ............................................................. 311.2.2 Identifying behaviours, motivations and patterns of engagement ........................ 34

Ladders, Spectrums, Toolboxes and Tactics: a model for citizen engagement? .............. 381.3

1.3.1 International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) ....................................... 401.3.2 European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP-

SCC) 411.3.3 Citizen Driven Innovation: World Bank and Living Labs ...................................... 431.3.4 Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning ................................................................... 451.3.5 Urban and Community Planning .......................................................................... 471.3.6 Selected additional frameworks and resources ................................................... 48

Citizens as consumers? Tensions and opportunities ........................................................ 501.4

2 Conclusions .......................................................................................................................... 52 Citizen engagement in the REMOURBAN Model ............................................................. 582.1

3 References ........................................................................................................................... 59



1 Development of a Model for Citizens and Consumers Engagement

Objective: The development of a model – or framework - for citizens and consumers engagement based on innovative current practices developed by cities and stakeholders and further enriched. The result is a set of principles and resources that aims to consider citizens as actors of the regeneration model and involving them to improve and customize it to their specific needs. The engagement and empowerment approach adopted towards citizens is intended to accentuate the benefits brought by citizens to the regeneration model and ensuring energy efficiency targets and smart city development are reachedi.

Introduction

Citizen engagement, participatory democracy and budgeting, social and citizen-driven innovation, accountable governance, co-creation… the number of terms are multiplying to try and capture the emerging and significant shift towards a more balanced approach to actively engaging with citizens to define the issues we face, to identify the solutions, and manage their delivery together.

Within the scope of public policy, governance and urban development one can globally refer to “processes by which public concerns, needs and values are incorporated into decision-makingii”. Processes through which, citizens – at some stage of the process and development – find themselves on equal footing as the person ‘in power’.

Of the many international and governmental institutions now focusing on social accountability and citizen engagement, particularly active is the World Bank, whose President Jim Yong Kim, put it that, "the citizen voice can be pivotal in providing the demand-side pressure on government, service providers, and organizations such as the World Bank that is needed to encourage full and swift response to citizen needs". For many this has a direct equation with good governance and worldwide there is increasing recognition that citizen involvement is critical for enhancing democratic governance, improving service delivery, and fostering empowerment. It is the ability of citizens, civil society organizations and other non-state actors to hold the state accountable and make it responsive to their needs.

For local authority officials and city projects, engaging effectively with citizens a way to build trust and relationships and a source of democratic legitimacy and transparency. It is an opportunity to listen and understand communities and individuals; crowd source and prioritise ideas; and to inform and educate others about challenges, constraints and ambitions. Last, but certainly not least, it is an effective way to ensure a more sustainable project, by not building or creating something the community doesn’t want.

A two way dialogue with benefits for both:

For Officials For Citizens Listen to and work with citizens directly Have a voice – make a change Inform & educate about project(s) and

local government Develop understanding and community

contact points Increase transparency Accountability

Make a tangible commitment Gain trust and implication Help realise a vision through sustainable,

successful projects Foster a sense of community and civic

pride Make local government work and finance

better Smarter understanding of services and

how much they cost



For example, in lighthouse city Nottingham, the goal is to transform the environment and the economy; and citizens are a partner in achieving this. Corporate Director of Development, David Bishop stated the following at the second project meeting: “We are striving to transform our economy within the framework of urban regeneration and sharing that with our citizens and communities”. Elsewhere in REMOURBAN cities and across Europe, a new generation of urban leadership attempting to embrace the opportunities of a sustainable, healthy and prosperous twenty-first century and using citizen engagement actions to deliver solutions and achieve it. From crowdsourcing and prioritising an entire city vision in Hamburg, to participatory budgeting in Paris, this part of the report will explore these further.

These notions of citizen engagement, shared power and involvement travel particularly well beyond the public policy sphere, and are remarkable in a multitude of contexts – especially in a digital age of social media. Indeed, in the world of ‘business to consumer’, fast paced electronics and personalised services, the key driver of citizen expectations and action in engagement could easily be cited as a major high street brand, electronics company or internet website. Across the board, our expectations to be solicited and engaged by whichever organisation, community or persons we interact with are up.

For businesses, understanding a customers needs, values and desires is critical to commercial success and brands are harnessing online and offline customer experiences to interact with clients – increasing the expectations of citizens and society at large to be engaged with. Companies today spend a huge amount of resources to help create and improve engagement, not for a single interaction, but over timeiii. Our favourite products and services are based on extensive consumer research, testing, and revision; conceived with specific needs and desires in mind. Brands seek to drive an emotional attachment, where we “love it!” and tell our family and friends to love it as well.

Increasingly powerful communication technologies are driving a more open, transparent, and collaborative relationship between them and their customers. In the commercial sphere, consumers also have the possibility to research, review and plan a purchase or service with peer-to-peer exchange and input. They will likely also have a series of performance guarantees, right to return or exchange, give feedback and review the product and company publicly.

Growing expectation gap in service delivery of public services



City authorities and decision-makers responsible for delivering smarter cities must be aware of the escalating expectations of citizens as consumers and the growing division between them in a fast paced and consumer driven world. People appreciate having a voice, with the possibility to make a change – with evidence to show a sense of satisfaction in being consulted, even if the final decision is a different one.

In terms of citizen engagement delivery and effectiveness, initiatives from across the content are fortunately growing in number and sophistication. Creatively speaking citizen engagement is principally strong, using a mix of media, messages and delivery to reach public audiences. Even if the conviction to address the topic is present, operational and tactical maturity in the delivery and evaluation of citizen engagement however, yet to be fully established.

From a managerial standpoint, local authorities must add definition to issues of accountability, financing and resources, data privacy, legality, ethics and ownership amongst other issues. Tactically, leaders of citizen engagement are still learning to navigate some common pitfalls. These can include special interest groups taking over the process, perpetual indecision, data management, concerns over time and money spent and, ultimately, long-term effectiveness and outcome changes. Precise evaluation indicators and performance measure of citizen engagement effectiveness are also not set in stone yet. It is therefore important to plan and propose strong visions of success – and failure – to be able to share internally and with the community. For city officials, a future set of ‘key behaviour indicators’ and measures of social cohesion and happiness may be a future set of measure.

For REMOURBAN specifically, it is important to recognise this context and expectations when considering citizen engagement in the public sphere and urban regeneration. Difficult to make a housing resident create an emotional attachment and affinity to a deep renovation that may disturb their home and community for months. Difficult to have a trusting, transparent relationship with precise deadlines and clear performance guarantees with local authorities, housing trusts and engineering contractors. Informing, consulting, creating urban regeneration projects with a deeper support from the community is a time-consuming, intellectual (rather than emotional), transactional and tricky task.

In social housing, successful transition to low carbon communities requires and eco-orientated neighbourhood development process in which residents are full partners. Deep renovation energy efficiency measures, new mobility options and smarter appliances and applications will only achieve their targeted carbon reductions if the tenants are conscious consumers of energy and adopters of measures and technology. When privately owned, the same applies; but with potentially more complex investment requests and diverse financing mechanisms. In private housing owners may only decide to invest if others do too, or the whole row of housing must all invest if the work is to be done at all.

The immediacy and impact on daily lives – particularly in the energy renovations – of this and other similar projects places particular challenges for citizen engagement. The ‘Not In My Back Yard’ (NIMBY) phenomena characterised by opposition of residents to a proposal for a new development because it is close to them, often with the connotation that such residents believe that the developments are needed in society but should be further away. ‘Nimbies’ may even support the environmental and mobility improvements proposed; but oppose implementing it in a way that would require sacrifice on their part. Additional investment in time, resources, planning and clarity – as well as a range of tools and methods to engage – is needed when, literally, this close to home.



With greater implication required from local authority, partners and residents on urban transformation projects set to happen in the near future, citizen engagement initiatives need to be highly developed and well executed.

Levels of implication, investment & proximity may dictate concerns, how engaged with and urban transformation initiatives proposed: (illustrative)

Implications and investments requested from citizens in REMOURBAN and similar projects might not only be financial or a disturbance – successful urban transformation may request fundamental and long lasting changes to behaviour, adoption of new technologies. Put this against a potential context of say, high-unemployment, low voter turnout, non-native speakers and newcomers, low density, high motorization, significant ageing population, social or privately owned housing and any number of combinations of these and the challenges are significant.

By examining a variety of best practices designed to achieve different levels of engagement and feedback across projects with a range of scopes and objectives, this report hopes to guide REMOURBAN cities and beyond. Originally tasked in ST1.3.3 in the development of a ‘model’ for citizens and consumer engagement, it was feared that with the unique set of ingredients (people, place, culture, etc..) it would be impossible to predict an engagement outcome in the mathematical sense.

However, these following pages are intended to be as loyal as possible to the dictionary definitions of “a simplified description of a system or process, to assist calculations and predictions” and “ an example to follow or imitate”.

Along the way a series of expert opinions are used to illustrate a variety of opinion and approach. Thank you to them for their precious input.



Building best practice: expert views and experience from 1.1Europe and beyond in citizen engagement

The objective of delivering a range of best practices and tools from a wealth of contexts in Europe and beyond is two-fold:

Firstly, citizen engagement is not yet a holistic and mainstream activity in our cities and regeneration projects. Secondly, the range of situations, tactics and tools pieced together in different cultures and communities to achieve a structured and effective citizen engagement approach is vast.

This section of the deliverable seeks to identify best practice and streamline these resources in a simplified three-level pyramid of inform and consult; include and collaborate; and empower and co-create. In order to aid this and for coherence across REMOURBAN, the same three ‘levels’ of engagement selected to organise the inputs and inspiration in a search for a citizen engagement model for others to replicate will be used again here:

Feeding into this will be the basic tenants of each engagement level, best practice examples and tools, insight interviews and key take-aways relevant to urban regeneration and energy efficiency – much as the city audits enabled this report to profile actions in REMOURBAN lighthouse and follower cities. Although in each context, culture and community the recipe for successful citizen engagement will be different, the principals established in this document are designed to ensure REMOURBAN cities and beyond have the correct ingredients to elevate and execute an improved citizen engagement.

LEVEL1Primarily1-way.'atdistance’-bymailInternet

LEVEL2Definitely2-way.Inperson,collectiveexperience

LEVEL3Activeandevolvingdialogue/interaction.Equal

powertodecideoutcomesatoneormanypartsoftheprocess

“…citizen engagement can be to help inform public policy, to help deliver public policy, or to help people to better understand and support public policy. It is cognitive, emotional and kinesthetic. It is strategic and tactical. It is serious and fun.”

Crispin Butteris, Bang The Table, Australia



Before getting started on the three categories of citizen engagement explored here, some universal principals can ensure a successful journey:

ü Be prepared to spend time and money

Transforming a citizen or community dynamic from apathy to engagement or suspicion to trust is a time-consuming journey. One that needs to be approached with sincerity and even a certain amount of skill, both on and offline. Shortcuts are few and successful engagement requires resources as well as political and personal will.

ü Plan carefully and with transparency

What is the scope of the project and what will it change or achieve? Upon what will citizens be able to decide, how and when? How are opinions received, treated and acted on? Is feedback given regularly and widely shared? How will citizen’s online data, ideas and opinions be managed? Citizens have to overcome a number of barriers to bring real value to the process. Make it easy for them to navigate with clear signposts and robust processes.

ü Ensure you have internal buy-in and political commitment

Beyond the buzzwords and quotes, is there a broad consensus and understanding of the long-term benefits and need to use citizen engagement? Is the local authority and its partners prepared to loose control at some point, embrace new and potentially time-consuming processes that could be derailed or refused? Are true actions up for mutual debate and discussion? It can be a culture shock, so make sure people are on-board.

ü Mix tools, methods and messages

One size certainly does not fit all – and ways to engage are the same. Decide how you want to interact and engage. Cross-reference with the goals and scope of the project before deciding on a mix of initiatives to achieve it. Perhaps an online tool with rich content and proactive facilitation can be a backbone; but more vocal and interested members of the community will give a great deal more input at a co-creation workshop.

1.1.1 Inform and consult Although good communications does not mean citizen engagement – it certainly needs good, excellent even, communications to succeed. Before starting out with any initiative, it is important to know where you are going, what the terrain will be, and whom you will meet there. Although entitled ‘inform and consult’, there is much that can be done to inform the citizens of an initiative and also inform oneself before attempting to execute it.

ü Understand civic assets and attitudes

Before any journey, assess the terrain. How big is the mountain to climb? Are there friends and resources along the way? Knowing the density, level of activity and maturity of associations and social organisations in a district, mapping social ‘connector points’ for the community such as schools, places of worship, healthcare centres and the like is precious. Equip yourself with voter turnout, levels of unemployment and literacy, crime rates and aggregating opinion and sentiment online and in local media



In the REMOURBAN city audits, this included:

• Mapping on and offline media channels, including their reach and use.

• Understanding density and footprint of civic and social associations and bodies

• Profiling the city’s socio-economic and demographic attributes in detail

• Noting voter turnout in different districts

Further insight could be collected by mapping social connector points, such as schools, places of worship, leisure, shopping centres, businesses and voluntary organisations.

In addition, local authorities and agencies can assess the level of use of online and e-services by district to, for example, define if a primarily online or offline awareness and engagement plan is more appropriate.

A common way of understanding issues and monitoring social and mass media sentiment in the business world is harnessing analysis of keywords and mentions. In turn, relatively accessible software can identify negative, neutral and positive disposition and volume of discussion. More advanced services identify key influencers, measures impact, highlights content and sets a basis for interacting with an online audience.

Social media analysis dashboard (example):

Such analysis may be able to aggregate general opinions on pre-set topics; but also identify new issues and sentiment. As such, this can be very valuable in conceiving and proposing key messages to motivate action, maintain interest and increase participation.

Another useful tool is the classic survey. If citizen surveys and focus groups are already in place, return to re-mine with specific citizen engagement or urban transformation actions in mind. With larger budgets, focus groups are also excellent sources of more detailed insight.

Specific surveying can be expensive; perhaps neighbouring cities, regional agencies or other departments have conducted this work. Elsewhere, the CITYKEYS project interviewed cities and citizens in multiple European cities to establish their awareness, priorities and expectations from smart cities projects.



CITYKEYS Deliverable 1.1

Online survey tools such as SurveyMonkey or SurveyGizmo can make reading where people stand on a particular issue with less time, effort and expense than traditional polling.

A consideration, however, when assembling insight from principally online sources, may be susceptible to a “digital divide” – that is to say not be entirely representative of the larger population due to technology, age or language issues.

In more specific development and planning zones, take stock of the skills in the neighbourhood and make a checklist of who to involve.

Finally, don’t forget to also map and recognise the cultural assets of a community. Heritage, trends, mind-set and other dynamics can be powerful forces for urban transformation, important in the tone and take-up by residents and value to visitors and businesses.

ü Clarity and simplicity

Well before, during and after any proposed works or citizen engagement initiative, leave the bureaucratic babble behind! Tone and languages is important in bridging the distance between administration and citizen. Equally, use visual tools and aids where possible. Info graphics, maps, visualisations and models are to be privileged over reams of text.

These might include large scale visual and 3-D models at points of confluence for the community, simplified fact sheets, clear and motivating messaging.

“A picture tells a thousand words…” is never truer than when sharing potentially technical assessments and initiatives. Mapping heat loss and equating to savings for the pocket or the planet can be particularly effective when informing residents about energy efficiency measures or canvasing buy-in for long-term transportation projects:



ü Plan the promotion

In order to first participate, citizens must first be aware of the possibility. How will people hear about your initiative and who will tell them are critical to making a good first impression. Consider market research and analysis to find out where your target audiences gets their information and be aware of literacy and numeracy levels in your target audience. If resourcing levels will allow face-to-face interaction, online moderation can facilitate the task.

Use established, recognized and trusted media channels before attempting to set up your own, which might drown in the sea of available content these days. Trust in local news media is still high.

That said, in person, consider using different voices to introduce information and consult opinion. Local NGOs and local businesses are highly trusted peers who will certainly have a founded opinion on urban transformation initiatives. The old fashioned noticeboard can also be a great ally, even in the digital age.

A small selection of tangible, printed materials remains an essential, especially when supporting face-to-face visits and group meetings. If resources allow, consider following up on a mass mailing with door to door visitors by housing officers, sustainable mobility advisors and other relevant personnel.

Consider any barriers that might exist in the community when planning on and offline information content. This could be linguistic, literacy, numeric, access to internet and more.

Incorporate instant and delayed feedback mechanisms from the start – a #hashtag perhaps for the media savvy and the bold! Or more traditional channels from a centralised email address to postage paid feedback forms. Track, catalogue and share feedback received correctly and in a timely fashion.

The overarching goals in inform and consult are provide the public with objective information to assist them in understanding the problem, plan, alternative, opportunity and/or solution. Take advantage of this opportunity by giving possibility for feedback, analysis and source alternative solutions. By taking this step towards residents, citizens, businesses and stakeholders, you subsequently engage yourself to keep people informed, acknowledge their concerns and aspirations and provide feedback on how public input has influenced decisions (even at this stage).



1.1.2 Include and collaborate This is where things start getting serious. ‘Working directly with the public to ensure their concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered’. A big step for most local authorities and their executing stakeholders. Beyond that, it means looking to citizens for advice in devising and implementing solutions – and incorporating that feedback into actual decisions as much as possible.

It could be considered the policy making equivalent of falling backwards and seeing if your colleague will catch you! A relationship and trust building exercise and a way to test and develop collaboration.

ü Work on location

‘Real people in real locations’ rather than convening a meeting in an unknown venue, with probably unknown travel plans, inconvenient times of day for some. Rather solicit a citizen on their terms and align with their choices, at a shopping centre, a school, a market and more. Use multiple locations to target a range of segments, demographics and backgrounds. Apply the same desire to meet on their turf online.

“…Citizen engagement provides access to knowledge that may otherwise remain hidden. Time again citizen engagement reveals that 'lay' people have local knowledge and expertise that is complementary to the 'experts'.”

Richard Bull, DeMontford University, UK

“The only sustainable growth lies in a paradigm shift: instead of serving the population, cities must involve the population as solution providers. Moving

from top-down to bottom-up is the most sustainable urban transformation and achieving smarter cities. On the other hand, it is also a smart political move!

Strongly believe we will observe this paradigm rapidly shifting in coming years.”

Jorge Saraiva, EngageCitizen, Portugal



A “walkshop” is more than just a district tour—it can be a moving conversation, educated and stimulated by looking around. Typically on foot or bike, walkshops allow community members and planners to better understand their neighbourhood together; to document community assets; and to showcase and discuss new and ongoing initiatives.

Organise a bike tour to help citizens discover the new cycle paths and mobility options, highlighting current improvements, and – above all - future initiatives. The City of Vancouver also used walkshops frequently and successfully in the creation of the award-winning Cambie Corridor Plan.

Open house events allow those promoting development initiatives to present them to a wider public and secure reactions in an informal manner. Less structured than a workshop and more informal than a traditional exhibition, they can be organised at any stage of the design and development process by any of the parties.

‘Pop up city halls’ can overcome issues of accessibility die to location or opening hours – two major hurdles to engagement. Twin public hearing and feedback sessions with the provision of useful key services to boost value and attendance. Schedule these carefully to reflect working hour patterns and availability of residents and citizens.

Make reaching out and collaborating part of real life. Could it be a tattoo parlour, job center, football league game or after-school meet-up? If that location is online – then go there too.

ü Put yourself in my shoes

Compromise, consensus and common ground each have a role to play in our decision-making activities. Cultivate a deeper understanding and appreciation for the position and constraints of each other with simulation games, role-playing exercises, citizen juries and more. Invite a resident to juggle a biomass budget and heat a comfortable home; or a technician to discover a child’s dream home renovation. Mutual understanding creates possibilities for complementary action.

Citizen juriesiv give a small group of ordinary citizens the charge of learning about an issue, listening to experts, cross-examining proposals and making a report or recommendations. Although non-binding, these give a deep understanding of the issues. Juries can be comprised of concerned citizens and representatives of key stakeholder groups, best placed to assess and multiply to audiences around the community.

School challenges allow the minds of the future to inspire and be inspired – and don’t forget they are citizens too! Allowing the next generation to have their say in designing new urban spaces and services can also safeguard their sustainability.



Role-playing can remove a great deal of risk and judgement, giving space for expression and understanding of ideas and opinions that may otherwise be hard to reach. In a classic technique of exchanging roles, citizens, planners, service providers and policy makers gain a clearer understanding by seeing the situation from another perspective.

Gaming development can be both online and offline. Fundamentally, they are also supposed to be fun or an ideal icebreaker! Held in a moderated group, played as a board game or even an app they prepare people for a specific challenge ahead, increase awareness or even shape preliminary proposals. Online games can be a tempting way to reach the touch screen generation, but beware of development costs and low potential usage when asked to compete for attention against established games, apps and online activities.

Consensus building decision-making and techniques are process used by groups seeking to generate widespread levels of participation and agreement to achieve project decisions. Done correctly, it can encourage compromised and provide structured and traceable decision-making. Define levels of consensus, i.e. a group does not have to agree entirely upon a decision but rather agree enough so the discussion can move forward. From unanimous vote to thresholds or event person-in-charge decides, there are a range of options. Individual preferences should not obstruct the progress of all – which can be an interesting exercise in itself.

There are a range of options to ensure that you can decide how you want to interact with the community and its citizens. Formal, informal, playful, creative, structured, targeted or mass participation.

“Under the right stimulus citizens become productive innovators who add value to the city's core values and development. Real smart cities are co-

creations with their citizens.” Jean-Paul Close,

STIR Foundation & AiREAS, The Netherlands



ü Assure feedback

Tell the community how their thoughts will be used and when and how you will get back to them. Share what changed and how citizens and the community shaped it with regular, transparent feedback. Translating small, high interest groups into wide-scale mobilisation and networks is fuelled by information and pace of delivery. Consider sharing more detailed insights according to segments and demographics. Breaking with bureaucratic tradition can reap reward to accelerate engagement

Say thank you – its is not something residents and citizens hear from authority figures very often, especially if they mean it. Recognising someone’s involvement can be as simple as an email, postcard, letter or online posts and social media.

Plan with professionalism workshops and events: keep a precise track of who and what organisations have been approached and who plans to attend. Be clear about what you want to achieve and the issues to be raised. Decide who leads the event, how long it will be, persons assisting and nominate someone to track and document outcomes, decisions and evaluate delivery.

Think about how to deliver feedback. Will a 20-page report be bedtime reading for anyone but the head engineer or councilor? Certainly not. They may watch a video, read an interview or social media post though. Internally, consider some of the same principals, like this reporting on participation and effectiveness in a Punjab anti-corruption program Citizen Feedback Monitoring Program.

Citizen Feedback Monitoring in healthcare, policing, public services feedback video

Evaluate participation with web statistics, feedback forms, exit interviews or online surveys. Ensure a range of participant profiles complete to get a range of opinions on the impact of the event or initiative and its appropriateness to achieve results and outcomes. Be prepared to change your delivery if it is not well received or effective.

Search for the hidden signals from your most important and complicated stakeholders – non-participants. Double back and connect politely with those who will not attend or participate to increase feedback received. Enquire whether you can connect with them in another way, time or include them in the circle of information as a silent, but informed, observer.

Ensure transparency with detailed reports with effective well presented content and summaries available publicly. Share the outcomes and decisions of any consultation process, giving information about measures to be adopted (or not) and why.



1.1.3 Empower and co-create In public participation circles, ‘Empower’ here has meant the placing of final decisions in the hands of the public. Though no dispute that this is critical to ‘true’ citizen engagement, a multi-level and complicated smart city project such as REMOURBAN, today, will likely only ever cede a minimal set of real decisions to another (the summoning of political will to make this happen is beyond the pages of this report). With this in mind, we take a broader definition of empower: to make someone stronger and more confident, especially in controlling their life and claiming their rights.

Not to be defeatist! Given how little citizens are currently consulted in smart city development, empowering people even to be a recognised part of the decision-making conversation or process seems appropriate and yet positive. More tangible opportunities to be addressed, heard and included in the decision-making process to have a mature local-authority-citizen relationship. Particular focus and thought is given to those who have never spoken out before; never felt they could speak out; never thought it would make a difference. The most empowering step in this context could even be the first one: from apathy and disinterest to concerned observer. For this reason, some of the best practices covered in this section are not only defined by the IPA2 definition of empowerment; but still represent an enlightened state of citizen engagement ‘mind’ and the third, most advanced set of best practices profiled here. The EIP-SCC ‘Citizen Focus’ group mission is nicely worded and pertinent to this position: “Enabling citizens with the tools and opportunities to create and problem-solve and facilitating conversation between stakeholders, so citizens’ voices are not only heard, but instrumental in designing solutions.“

Citizens taking their place & finding their voice as part of a ‘Quintuple Helixv’

Co-creation as a way to jointly produce a mutually valued outcome is included unaltered and a welcome nod to the increasingly business and market-driven development of cities, regions and government services. It is a fundamental change to the historical ‘supplier and consumer’ relationship between government and citizens. Co-creation can also be considered in the terms of an emerging Quintuple Helix - the active flow of information and ideas among five sectors of society: government, academia, business, non-profits and citizens – to tackle the systemic change facing our cities and societies todayvi.



ü Inclusive, inventive and accessible on & offline

Diversity is strength in engagement. It can bring additional quality and quantity of ideas; but also credibility and legitimacy to initiatives. Although technology is the overwhelming driver, different approaches are needed to address citizens’ various needs - including the technophobic. Be respectful of the socio-demographic, linguistic and cultural diversity of a community, addressing a wide range of ages, status, incomes and ethnicities both on and offline.

Take advantage of technology, mobile and online communications allow people to communicate in a myriad of ways. Instant feedback on issues via an app, live broadcasts or webinars to facilitate attendance, accessible content, SMS polls and social media. With most European cities already highly connected, use them to break the cycle of poorly attended meeting with the same faces and vocal opinions.

Bang the Tablevii: illustrating how easily citizens can be or feel excluded

Open the data to drive digital, social and governmental innovation. It is freely available to use, reuse and redistribute by the public. In that sense it is more ambitious than the concept of transparency, because it allows citizens to not just access data but to analyze, visualize and share it with others.

Really open the data: Think about bringing data to life for more than the code or excel literate to curate, visualize and share data sets. It is an immediate way to sensitize researchers, journalists, policy makers and citizens to real issues and constraints. An idea way to balance and integrate expert and informal knowledge and insight. Partner with local sustainable transport NGO to map traffic flow and pollution hotspots in the district for instance. Embrace the European FIWARE standard for smart city data.

“Barriers (to citizen engagement) begin with the administration model which typically comes from the previous century. In this frame, cities need to play the role of the facilitator by initiating the dialogue that can result in the delegation of some decision-making to the new or existing collective structures.”

Nikolaos Kontinakis, EuroCities



Open data using FIWARE: part of empowering citizen input and action on energy and transport choices in London, UK and Santander, Spain

Devolve the data to a new social structure viiias part of a FabLab, LivingLab, cultural center or other such organization with a focus activity on urban transformation, environment, new energy services or mobility. Work with a non-commercial objective to harness a community sourced approach to social spaces and services using ICTand Internet of Things (IoT).

Create a public dashboard, visual data-driven information is an idea way to share information with citizens. Help them understand real data from their neighbourhoods and how it affects the planet, the people who live there and public services.

Engage all five sectors of the community – business, government, citizens, academics, NGOs. Take advantage of their unique needs, expertise and perspectives into account to provide more opportunity for creative solutions. This also reduces the risk of implementing solutions that are not relevant or appropriate for the communities involved.

Consult with voluntary and charitable organisations to make an informed assessment of how to engage in person or online most effectively. Understand cultural or personal sensitivities and overcome social divides. Be prepared to consider independent facilitation, need for interpreters and signers, specific outreach activities and changes to format and content of communication materials.

“#CivicTech” maybe technology driven, but its about “residents engaging in their communities, including sharing their time, information and resources”ix – connecting citizens to services, and one another. It can be inventive and inclusive by using data and devising services for public good and bettering the lives of many, not just the few.

DecarboNet: a “Collective Awareness Platform” using social feedback to help decarbonize cities



ü What’s in it for me? Quality information, benefits, incentives, entertainment, recognition, reward – or just the pleasure of sharing or getting something done. Just some of the reasons citizens make the choice to engage, stay motivated to do so, and encourage others to do the same. Tap into the aspirations and interests of your audience as well as your practical constraints and budgets to be creative in this aspect.

Fix it: The precursor initiatives of FixMyStreet were launched as early as 2007 by a not-for-profit social enterprise. It gives people the power to get things changed, even if they don’t know who is responsible. From powerless suffering to proactive part of the solution solving. End benefit could be knowing a cyclist won’t fall due to a pothole, or the graffiti removed improves the urban environment. Part of a range of ‘civic empowerment’ tools developed by MySociety and a concept endlessly applied elsewhere.

Connect with the community, feel good, meet new people, share a skill, test yourself, give something back, a sense of achievement…there are a thousand personal reasons for contributing to or evolving our urban environment. Understanding some of them, being able to identify key personal motivations and aligning actions to them is beneficial to all. Articulate why a project is good for an individual and the community clearly – even if it’s also for the planet.

Share my ideas: crowdsourcing initiatives can give possibility to propose, share, select, rank and reward proposals from across the community. Online tools enable reaching much larger audiences, more effectively at lower cost than ever before. Crowd source for ideas on hyper-local development, planning and spending, to national law making – all the way through to saving the planet!

Competitions with incentives and prizes can drive participation; increase the appeal and reward contributions. Whether the objective is a family taking less short trips by car, a school reducing its CO2 emissions or moving public services online, an appropriate prize can be delivered according to performance, by lottery or even just for participating.

Gamification can be an exciting and appealing way to explore issues and change behaviour across multiple sectors. In a risk free environment, players can see the impacts of their choices made. Games are not just for children either – and the experience can be designed to reward novice, expert and master levels. They offer extensive opportunities for measurement and tracking of use, even when results are shared on a users social media.

Give me a stake: equity sharing, community dividends, shared profits from selling energy back to the grid at peak times. Successful projects can have an interesting financial value to share and motivate participation.

“In many cases, the same citizens will participate and engage in many different events and projects, while the majority of citizens will stay passive or indifferent. This is especially true in the field of urban development as the topics often feel abstract and far from the citizens’ own experience. Generating a greater understanding of the issues at stake and a sense of community is crucial to induce widespread engagement and effect.”

Bernd Kappenstein, Director, Energy & Environement

Metropolregion Rhein-Neckar GmbH, Germany



Gamification in mobility: +10 points for not using the car: think its easy? European project segmentproject.eu and partner keek.be explored attitudinal design before designing games

The collaborative consumption economy: peer-to-peer sharing and community organising is one of the most mature, well financed and potentially biggest source of social revolution in our cities today. It can represent technology at its finest – when it simplifies, connects and empowers our lives. Sharing reinvented by technology is often illustrated by the block of flats with 10 inhabitants. Each of them has paid €80 for a drill they use 1-2 times a year. A collaborative consumption app allows them to share the resources, and have perhaps only 1 drill for the block. Less production, less environmental damage, closer communities, money saved, etc. The same way a drill can be shared, so can knowledge, skills, time, finance, ideas.

AirBnB might be the most high-profile example; but the same principals are being turned to ride sharing cars, land, office-space and more. “New urbanism”, creating more walkable, environmentally friendly cities, making new patterns of consumption possible are all part of the collaborative economy.

Sharing renewable energy through cooperatives, crowdfunding sustainable energy and construction – people are doing it with and for themselves. Smart municipalities like Amsterdam, with their Share.nl initiative are making sure they are part of it as an architect of public, private and citizen activity.

Sharing and collaborating initiatives in the city of Amsterdam



Watch out cities: 4 key conditions for collaborative consumption disruption

ü Define and measure success

Citizen engagement success treads the line between key performance and key behaviour indicators anchored deep in a community’s social fabric. In practical terms measures in audience size, interaction, participation and satisfaction must be deployed to reflect the scope and objectives of the specific initiative. Explore connection with broader economic, skills and civic goals whenever possible.

Make the rules clear: when, where, how and with what potential outcomes is the citizen being engaged? What resources and tools are available to the local authorities, organisations and citizens to participate? Clarity of scope and objective should be shared and reinforced along the way.

Gauge the interest from mass and social media. Use standard online practices to examine visitor numbers to web resources, how much time they spend and how they consume and share content.

Consider specialist platforms, designed for citizen engagement, for crowdsourcing ideas, running participatory budgets or working to create online community and interest around an

“I expect a reconsideration of formal citizen engagement, towards a more focused and professional approach, with an increased use of NTICs. I also expect a growth in informal participation practices, caused by mistrust towards the public institutions as well as by the possibilities offered by cheap NTICs. However, if we don’t achieve a meaningful connection between both spheres, conflict will prevail over collaboration.”

Ramon Canal Oliveras,

Autonomous University of Barcelona, Spain



issue. Use their technology to map strength of feeling, number of mentions and number of interactions again geo-location to get a detailed idea of what matters where and to whom. Beyond this extremely useful feature, many also incorporate ‘up’ and ‘down’ votes and other such metrics.

Quality vs. quantity? Learn how to decipher pure numbers of feedback or interactions with the quality of ideas received and comments received for instance. Does a small but very vocal minority drown out other voices that showed interest? If the project was able to cultivate meaningful input from a small number of citizens from a previously silent but dissatisfied group, then the proportional success could be significant.

Create an idea generation funnel with targets and metrics appropriate to each step for crowdsourcing actions. Number of ideas received yes; but how many received feedback or met a threshold for ‘top’ idea to be explored further for instance. Perhaps taking just three initiatives to a participatory budget vote is an outstanding success!

Connect engagement goals to broader key performance indicators, such as neighbourhood CO2 emissions, emissions per inhabitant, private and public transport splits. Make them ‘talk’, removing the technical jargon and putting into imaginable impacts; number of trees, reduction in cars on the road and additional kilometers walked by residents or money saved.

Meaningful indicators to engineers are not the same to citizens and residents

Use existing city information to understand secondary and long-term benefits of citizen engagement - like use of community facilities, voter turnout, online versus offline take up of e-services, number of community organisations and examine over time. Look for different ratios between KPIs that signal behavior change and adoption of new information and tools.

Look at secondary indicators It may be that the first engagement project did not meet its own specific goals; but over time has contributed plenty to the regeneration and relations within the community in another respect. Are private home renovations up, planning disputes down? Perhaps anti-social behavior such as graffiti and tagging is also down? Very telling indirect measures of civic engagement with direct and indirect connections.



ü Find your citizens’ voice and champions

Delivering urban transformation is a team exercise. Moving from core group, to early adopters and making the leap to establish social proof may have its language roots in product innovation; but reaching a ‘tipping point’ is critical in any domain. Recognise the players, steps and language needed to spread awareness and create engagement. Initial community discussions and tactics may be complex. Adapt messaging, delivery and decision-making power accordingly once the initiative gains momentum amongst the many.

Malcom Gladwell’s ‘tipping point’ and social acceptance of ideas, innovations & services

Media ‘mavens’ and ‘brokers’ of information in the community is a way the national health service in the UK and now housing and smart cities in Cologne, Germany have taken the bold step of giving citizens a voice. Volunteers produce articles, videos, photos or podcasts with simple resources, supported by technical know-how and equipment to share with fellow inhabitants on issues of local concern. Reporters receive training, practice skills and get help publishing their stories online. Although they operate under a code of behaviour and editorial guidelines; they are, completely independent. Smart cities from a citizen’s perspective.

Civic hacking is hands on citizen-driven action, which produces civic innovations. It could be an app based on open data, designing and building street furniture using a 3D printer at a



FabLab, or a re-think it workshop about social policy with councillors. The action could be targeted solely at a highly skilled community to develop code and programs that will, in turn benefit the many; or mix technical and non-technical to pair up, learn and accelerate wider adoption.

It offers opportunities for citizens and governments to connect, skills to bloom, new products and services to be generated for the good of the community – and even successful spin off and start up businesses to be founded. GitHub is an open source community of civic-generated code and more that facilitates collaboration in this field. Unlike the private sector, governments and citizens come together to share their code without thinking about profit margins first; but improving each other’s lives and services.

A self-sufficient, sustainable FabLab outside Barcelona and a code ‘Hackathon’ in Budapest

A citizen academy can be a week or weeks long immersion to teach interested and motivated citizens about a particular area or set of initiatives. A town or regional smart city strategy for instance. Courses can mix on and offline sessions, a professional syllabus and even accredited learning certifications. Praise from participants, their confidence in services and future direction is generally high, creating some highly informed and potentially influential ambassadors.

“(Citizen engagement) will definitely need to evolve from one off, occasional engagement to substantial sharing, co-design and co-creation. City governance needs to be radically and profoundly transformed, work across sylos. An ability to delegate power will become crucial.

…Driven by the potential of mobile communication and Internet of Things, citizens will take the lead in ICT design and adaptation more and more, and this will increase dramatically in future generations as coding skills will become the basic grammar of everyday life and communication.”

Maria Sangiuliano ECWT (European Centre for Women and Technology) and

EIP SCC Citizen Focus Action Cluster



1.1.4 Evaluating engagement and social acceptance

Citizen engagement is a relatively young and evolving topic. It rests on the entirely unique shoulders of citizens with their own values, perceptions, experiences, decisions and - on top of that - within an increasingly complex urban environment. Hardly surprising then that practitioners currently struggle to establish a common framework of ‘key performance indicators’ or evaluation. W. Edwards Deming is often incorrectly quoted as saying, "You can't manage what you can't measure." In fact, he stated that one of the seven deadly diseases of management is running a company on visible figures alone. When assessing people, there is certainly plenty of invisible.

Worth noting that difficulty finding the right transversal evaluation measures in urban transformation is full of difficulties. In the massive swelling of data collected and now available across all aspects of our smart(er) cities, city leaders and others are struggling to get to grips and make sense of it all. What does it all mean, how to analyse it, is it the right data, what to share, when and with whom?

It is certain that REMOURBAN, along with many local, national and European projects are trying to contribute to a greater common understanding. The EIP-SCC ‘Citizen Focus’ action cluster has given itself the target of 2020 for proposing a working framework for evaluation.

However, in the meantime, we can be professional in the execution of a project, and define targets, indicators and metrics for success (or failure) for an initiative based in best practice. Most important to recognize, these are defined in function of the objectives and scope of the engagement initiative.

Hence, an evaluation indicator for a crowdsourcing project requiring five minutes, ‘risk-free’ time online; and a initiative requesting the energy efficiency of the entire district be address this year and co-financed by the city and residents will be quite different! Immediacy, impact, investment required from all parties (time and money at the least) and the project timeframe all come into play.

Size of participation is often a first evaluation indicator; but what are citizens being asked to participate in, how are they ‘recruited’ to participate – because they are highly motivated and free to? Or by virtue that they have always lived in a house that has now been designated for deep renovation? Is level of commitment an indicator? Are the citizens engaged representative of their community, in socio-economic and demographic terms? By comparison, analyzing how many visitors to a website, Facebook likes or tweets made is Childs play.

Some resources and thoughts have been shared on process in 4.1.2. under the ‘assure feedback’ heading and evaluation in 4.1.3 on ‘inclusion’ and ‘define and measure success’. Further evaluation and social acceptance are examined here.

“(Evaluating citizen engagement)…”That's the million euro question. We should consider the right answer and not rush to find easy answers. Framing the question properly will be important to finding and evaluating these metrics. The process is more important than the goal in achieving progress and success.”

John Zib, Social Entrepreneur, Germany



In a 2012 publication ‘A Manager’s Guide to Evaluating Citizen Participation’, Tina Nabatchi of Syracuse University, United States, evaluation is focused on the citizen engagement projects and programmes themselves as a way of institutionalizing quality. They must be ‘useful, cost-effective, ethical and beneficial’ it is stated. Two types of relevant evaluation are proposed:

• Process evaluations: to help managers better understand and improve implementation and management;

• Impact evaluations: to help managers determine whether the citizen engagement programme has reaches its intended audience and produced its intended effects

Professor Nabatchi proposes a range of tools to asses satisfaction, efficiency, reasons for lower than expected performance, alignment and conformity. Notably, she underlines the importance of a rigorous approach because of delicate issues of accountability, ethics, legality and ownership that are intertwined with engagement.

Evaluation of the engagement itself though is hampered by several challenges, with no agreed-upon methods and few reliable measurement tools. Its is “an inherently complex and value-laden concept”.

For further insight into the process of citizen engagement, it is interesting to note the work of Bull, Petts and Evansx on the importance of context as a determining factor in effective public participation. Their rare comparative examination of engagement in the waste disposal industry, identified the strength of partnership working between the public and private sector, degree of political support for engagement, and the extent to which a traditional institutional paternalism still dominates as critical to eventual engagement outcomes. Judith Pett proposes five-fold criterion for evaluation:

(1) Representativeness of the participants

(2) Procedural fairness

(3) Compatibility with the objectives of the participants

(4) Degree of awareness and knowledge achieved

(5) Impact on the decision process.

This work enhances the first paper cited in this section and concludes despite best intentions in effective and evaluated delivery, a policy shift towards greater community engagement can be ‘undone by complex and messy local contexts’. Of further interest to this report, they also conclude that ‘public engagement is not a suite of methods that can be rolled out from place-to-place regardless of local context’.

CITYKEYS is a horizontal and coordinating action to the smart cities and communities projects of the European Union. Its aim is to ‘develop and validate, with the aid of cities, key performance indicators and data collection procedures for the common and transparent monitoring as well as the comparability of smart city solutions’.

Recognising the dangers and fallibility of being too prescriptive – particularly about an entity as complex as a smart city. The project is rather seeking to provide a facilitating tool for cities that flexible and modular. A workforce of keen minds from cities and institutions have analyzed so far more than 40 smart city frameworks and conducted extensive citizen surveys about “smart city” perceptions and needs.

Following this work, they have made some assertions that also address citizen engagement within some broader assertions on the ‘state of play’ in an article for ‘Open your city’:



In CITYKEYS work to define appropriate indicators, a total 108 project indicators and 78 city indicators have been selected across a framework of people, planet, profit:

For the project, a selection of six indicators in three categories - co-creation, community engagement and multi-level governance - have a direct bearing on the topic of citizen engagement:

o City performance indicators should not provide a fixed picture of a city, but rather reflect and acknowledge its progress and direction

o Cities must define their own priorities and problems to tackle, chossing the right KPIs from a wider palette of indicators

o More often than not, indicators should rely on open data published by cities, and aggregate indicators should be open source, i.e. the calculations and formulas must be publicly available and accountable.

o We still don’t know (and probably never will) what a smart city means, but we agreed that it should encircle concepts such as inclusion, education, innovation, energy poverty, social cohesion, enhanced participation and quality of public space. Although they might seem common sense, not all of these are found in all smart city definitions.



These provide some useful progress and recognition for citizens in smart cities performance indicators; but remain heavily qualitative and based on a Likert scale assessment. Whilst not yet a detailed and also quantitative mix of indicators a November 2015 in-depth report on indicators for sustainable cities, published by the European Commission and based on research by the University of West of England, UK reveals the near total absence of citizens in 12 indicator frameworks and a further 10 indicators and assessment based tools.

The search for meaningful evaluation by the EIP-SCC ‘Citizen Focus’ action cluster has given itself the target of 2020 for proposing a working framework.

In a first working meeting to ask members to consider this target in their variety work for EIP, their own business, organisations and academic interests, the following elements were brought to the fore. They are in no way binding, cited only at the beginning of a long conversation and a personal report but hold value for REMOURBAN cities to consider nonetheless.



Work to follow closely and for REMOURBAN to contribute actively to the action cluster by submitting ‘commitments’ detailing work, experiences and outputs in the field to add to these efforts in establishing a transversal framework across multiple cities, regions and countries.

The Australian organization Bang the Table has developed a number of approaches, notably in online engagement and consultations. As a starting point, their framework uses three indicators to get a broad sense of citizen engagement with an issue:

(1) AWARE - how many people can you legitimately say are aware of your project?

(2) Informed - of the aware people, what proportion can you legitimately say are reasonably well informed about the issues? This could be downloading online documents, watching videos, calling into drop-in centers, having conversations with project staff etc.

(3) Engaged - of the aware people, what proportion has actually involved themselves in some way? This could be anything from completing a survey, to joining a workshop, to helping to implement a project, to uptake of a technology or a process.

Further enhancements to these broad categories may be found in connecting citizen engagement indicators to broader innovation, skills and assets measures. For example in ICT, this could includexi:

• e-governance tools and platforms coverage and use • Open Data and Open Government embedded in policy making • % smart services and solutions of co-designed and co-created • Rates of inclusion in open start up and innovation ecosystems

Appropriate measures in mobility (i.e., modal share, trips by private vehicle under 5km) and energy (i.e., CO2 emissions per inhabitant) likewise to be employed.

Increased maturity in evaluating citizen engagement will certainly mean better connecting to city development strategies in skills, economic development and social indicators such as these, as well as secondary and long-term benefits of citizen engagement - like voter turnout, use of community facilities, reduction in planning complaints and minimizing anti-social Look for different ratios between KPIs that signal behavior change and adoption of new information and tools. This new generation of Key Behaviour Indicators may include more human topics and metrics on subjects such as age-friendliness, community health, sharing, such as the recent initiatives in Amsterdam, The Netherlands or even the mythical ‘happiness index’.

Looking to other sectors and initiatives to inspire more targeted evaluation should also include work in ‘social learning’ – the theory that people learn by observing others, which is often deployed in smart city pertinent areas such as sustainable development. The Research Program on Climate Change Adaptation and Food Security have recently proposed framework consisting of a theory of change and 30 primary indicators across four key areas: iterative learning, capacity development, engagement, and challenging institutions. Elements of consideration for citizen engagement in smart cities include:

• Power dynamics shaping relationships and decision-making between stakeholders • Who is engaged, why and how • Institutional opportunities and barriers to social learning • Capacity of people to participate and contribute meaningfully



Finally, strong potential source for improved evaluation metrics and insight come from emerging citizen engagement and crowdsourcing specific platforms, able to generate a new range of insights and analytics. Already cited in section 4.1.3 of this report, these can include;

• Up & down votes: instant peer-to-peer feedback on citizen ideas • Social media shares: reach and virality • Petition numbers, intensity of voting • Content contributions • Reports of service failures • Mobile app usage

All combined with an ability to cross reference with

• Sentiment (i.e., positive/neutral/negative) • Geo-location (i.e., which neighbourhoods rank which issues, with what sentiment &

level of participation)

Citizen engagement specific platforms such as CitizenLab.co might create new insights and lasting metrics to consider

Evaluation of citizen engagement is, then, more a developing art rather than a science yet. REMOURBAN and fellow cities should apply rigorous management to the tangible delivery of a chosen process – such as surveys and event evaluation and incorporate indicators that reflect the objectives and scope of a particular initiative to complement.

Although just coming into existence the EIP-SCC suggestion and Bang the Table approaches display signs of potential for proposing KPIs in each category, to be imagined with local context, data collection and relevance in mind. When matched with more easily available web and social media statistics, citizen engagement strategies in a city may already be considered well served.

Further thought needs to be given in each city context to precise metrics and evaluation given, reflecting the broader goals and strategies of a city and may consider developing some of the other frameworks suggested above and following the work of CITYKEYS and eventual evolution to platforms like the Smart Cities Information System.



Better understanding and targeting the citizens we engage with 1.2

Humans are complicated and unique beings. Understanding them better before conceiving, promoting and soliciting engagement is not an easy task; but surely one that will increase our chances of success and help in the development of a model for citizen engagement.

What does participation mean to one citizen, and not to another? Are their commonalities to different types of participation? Why do people get involved and, more importantly, how can we keep them involved over time?

Social inclusion, moving beyond just the usual suspects and making a particular effort to engage people on the first step of the ladder has already been cited several times as critical to sustainable democracy, decision-making and urban transformation. If that is the case, which people are currently out of the loop, why and how can they be reached? Not all these questions will be answered here; but some schema and segmentation explored to better understand our communities, the people within them, and ultimately how to connect with them in a devolving and evolving urban ecosystem.

Firstly, three key categories of participation as defined by the UK National Council for Voluntary Organisations in their ‘Pathways to Participation’ research that are useful to consider:

• Public participation: The engagement of individuals with the various structures and institutions of democracy. Key to this is the relationship between individuals and the state

• Social participation: The collective activities that individuals may be involved in. The associations they may form between and form themselves are the heart of this

• Individual participation: The individual choices and actions that people make as part of their daily life and that are statements of the kind of society they want to live in. For example, donating money to a particular charity or boycotting a product

1.2.1 Segmenting actors within the community

The OECD ‘Focus on Citizens’ report recognised that there are many good reasons for people not to participate in policymaking and public service design and delivery. However, they did define two broad groups:

• People who are “willing but unable” to participate for a variety of reasons such as cultural or language barriers, geographical distance, disability or socio-economic status;

• People who are “able but unwilling” to participate because they are not very interested in politics or the community, do not have time, or do not trust the government to make good use of the input.

They understandably argued in the report that to engage the “willing but unable”, governments and local authorities must invest in lowering the barriers – with multi-lingual information, for example. For the “able but unwilling”, the offer must be more attractive. This could be more relevant issues, greater mix of tools and methods to express participation or increasing proximity to seek their engagement, rather than coming to the government.

Elaborating further on these axes, a range of segmentation attempts has been made, assigning personality traits and types according to means (financial, time, capacity…) and motivation (interest, reward…) to different issues and concerns of the day.



In terms of a more general appreciation and engagement of societal issues, a ‘citizen matrix’ that is by no means prescriptive; but perhaps food for thought on some behaviours is here below:

Motivation vs. Means: 4 personality types in terms of engaging with social causes, supporting local communities and charities...

The analysis is narrow and even vast generalisations; but may be adapted and re-written for a range of local contexts as part of a useful exercise: (therefore Illustrative)

Approval Seekers: Aged 15 – 35 across all social groups. Willing to learn, ambitious, energetic and experimental, concerned about how they are perceived, keen sense of adventure, early adopters. Claim to be willing to volunteer and may have strong views on ethical and environmental issues.

Agents of Change: a person from inside or outside an organization or community who can help them transform itself by focusing on improvement, and development, often taking a leading role. Socially and perhaps environmentally committed, ethics and provenance are key buying criteria, optimistic and creative.

‘Walled Gardeners’: Mostly aged 65 plus. Affiliated to places of worship and community organisations but not necessarily an active participant support a charity and contribute to fundraising initiatives. Believe in duty and tradition, don’t want responsibility, spend a lot of time at home, with regular rituals and routines. Feel put upon by intrusion and irritated by change, but rarely express their true feelings.

Social Skeptics: Mostly aged 35 plus, C2DE social groups. Spend a lot of time at home. Life is a struggle, computers confuse them, have money worries, skeptical about ethical and environmental issues but otherwise don’t have strong views about anything, disenfranchised and disempowered.



The citizen matrix does serve to show that identifying different groups of a community or city is not only a tangible exercise – looking at age, gender, income, renter, owner etc.; but essential to consider the ‘emotional’ traits of the community – their perceptions, values, communication skills, personality types, attitudes towards environmental and urban issues.

Several other areas of consideration for better understanding and targeting engagement actions for the community may also consider:

Established vs. Transient Residents

The value proposition, motivation and even possibility to consider a medium-to-long term financial package to fund energy efficiency measures will certainly not mean the same to either group. If the ultimate objective is, say, CO2 reduction, then a series of behaviour-changing rather than investment measures may be more appropriate.

Members of the community attempting to be engaged also posses – and react to different personality types and communication styles. There are nine different temperament traits, which shape personality and therefore affect thinking, behaviour, and developmental processes. The nine different types of temperament can be placed into three main temperament trends or categories. Worth considering, especially for more implied and face-to-face engagement.

Personality types and communication styles



1.2.2 Identifying behaviours, motivations and patterns of engagement

In looking further into this area, work dedicated to urban transformation – and even community planning – appears scarce. Attempting to draw inspiration for developing a model of citizen engagement, which might work for REMOURBAN and similar projects, we have had to look further afield. This includes ideas and frameworks from the voluntary sector, business and even gaming. Acknowledging motivations, including an individual’s personality and identity, and values, beliefs and worldview is much stronger outside of the public sector and so there is much to learn.

The excellent collaboration between The UK’s National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) has, in partnership with the Institute for Volunteering Research (IVR) and the excellent Involve developed a framework for understanding individuals’ pathways through participation:

It is particularly rich in exploring the multiple and unique combinations of context, perceptions, values, formative experiences, place and relationships to name a few. These are the key experiential elements that put participation in practice and influencing people’s actions. The work also explores the intensity of engagement, for example, and whether an individual or collective activity. Their work went on to propose a ‘participation equation’ exploring why participation starts, continues or stops. Anchored in deep social science research, these equations certainly hold value for engagement far beyond the voluntary sector:



Why participation starts:

And why participation continues or stops:

Away from the voluntary sector, and into behavioural economics and advertising, is the recent “Nudge” phenomenon, after the book by Richard H Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein entitled “Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness”.

They outlined a ‘nudge’ as an intervention that preserves freedom of choice but that nonetheless influences people’s decisions. Individuals are often heavily affected by behavioural biases, referring to a default option and leading to predictable mistakes. They outline that this is further reinforced by social norms.

So what if that default position is to use a car for a short trip, leave the heating on and walk the house mid-winter in shorts or ignore the recycling bin? In some governments, the behavioural phycology techniques have been used to improved tax collection, stemmed student dropout rates and moved more people off benefits and into work. The technique is already used to encourage more environmentally friendly behavior. High potential for cities and citizens to get smarter together is outlined in ‘Nudge, nudge, think, think; experimenting with ways to change civic behaviour’, available online. .

“Improving participation opportunities requires starting where people are and taking account of their concerns and interests, providing a range of opportunities and levels of involvement so people can feel comfortable with taking part, and using the personal approach to invite and welcome people in”

Pathways to Participation report



This approach has given birth to the concept of ‘Civic Upselling’ to encourage incremental but meaningful increases in engagement, challenging and overcoming the default position one step at a time. It’s a bit like buying an airline ticket and being asked if you would like to reserve a car or hotel at the same time as well – getting two transactions, or commitments, out of one.

Another “nudge” in the right direction, the journey from apathy to enthusiasm:

Some traits and behaviours to explain this segmentation further:

1. Uninterested/apathetic: amotivated a. Because of social, physical, financial reasons, “out of the loop”

2. Consumer: extrinsically motivated a. Open to information and ideas; but constrained/lacks opportunity b. Can develop an awareness of the project

3. Contributor: extrinsically motivated a. Gives an opinion b. Prepared to criticize and participate

4. Commenter/leader: intrinsically motivated

a. May wish to see initiative flourish (or die!) b. Potential leader/opinion former/advocate or ambassador



While the impulse to define on and offline interactions as fundamentally and un-reconcilably different is thankfully dying away in a world where the two mix more seamlessly than ever, it is interesting to make reference solely to the online participation. Particular skills and content delivery are required and tools deployed according to whether it is a niche, high-intensity community or a one-shot series of interactions. Dereck Wenmoths “4C’s and Bang The Table’s 100 ideas to engage your community online both offer some additional insight to online only tools and techniques.

The ‘4 C’s’ of online community building

CONSUMER COMMENTER CONTRIBUTOR COMMENTATOR

Motivation:

• Togaininsight,informationandbeexposedtonewideas

Motivation:

• Shareopinions• Experimentwith

makingaresponsetosomeoneelse’sinitiativesorideas

Motivation:

• Testnewideas&opinions

• Receivecritiqueandfeedback

• Topublish&beheard

Motivation:

• Toseethecommunitygrowandflourish

• Provideleadershipwithinthecommunity

Outcomes:

• Developsknowledgebase

• Increasesunderstanding

Outcomes:

• Increasedconfidence

• Greaterclarification

• Affirmationofthinking

Outcomes:

• Contributestotheknowledgebase

• Newideastested&refined

Outcomes:

• Vibrant&self-sustainingcommunity

• Leadershiprolesareofferedandencouraged

“Linking” “Lurking” “Learning” “Leading”

Understanding, segmenting, targeting, interacting and encouraging as explored in the last two sections is potentially fertile ground for tools and techniques to accelerate engagement. The challenge remains to find the right framework for all these ingredients.

Involvement builds people’s confidence, capabilities, skills and ability to co-operate. This enables them to tackle other challenges, both individually and collectively

Nick Wates, www.communityplanning.net



Ladders, Spectrums, Toolboxes and Tactics: a model for citizen 1.3engagement?

The three-level approach chosen to categorise and rationalise REMOURBAN citizen engagement and best practice is heavily inspired by the IAP2 public participation spectrum and a range of academic and practitioner attempts to make a definitive and insightful framework. To benefit the project partners and replication cities and to support the search for an ‘urban transformation model’ an overview of some of these is conducted here.

The REMOURBAN approach is inherently a positive model to much of the academic work on the subject seeking to show a positive evolution to engagement. It is important to note that not all engagement equals good engagement. Therapy, manipulation, tokenism, placation are all words readily associated to attempts to engage with publics, communities, individuals and groups. Strong language and potential dangers to address.

Earning trust, gaining a share of mind is an investment made over time – and as with any relationship, it can be quickly lost. Whilst looking for the tools for success, one should not forget either the slippery slope to failure as well.

Prieto-Martin & Ramirez-Alujas, Participation Schemas (2013)

For a group of residents, being consulted and engaged; only for nothing to be done with their opinions and inputs may be more aggravating than if they were never consulted at all. Further up our proposed scale, working to build skills and empower citizens might be considered inflammatory by some if the proposed outcome is only superficial or patronising.

Engagement in the 21st century can also reflect an online world and services. Often the most effective way of reaching a mass audience, these tools can induce a range of specific



behaviours that are certainly important to distinguish and consider. Ferro and Molinari devised a new e-ladder of participationxii usefully mapped across Arnsteins ladder.

The prominent position of ‘critics’ reflects the ability of a loud minority to carve a substantial presence online and often a fear of policy makers, business leaders and more when opening up avenues for expression in a digital age. However, the ability to attract many new, less mobile and broader audiences spread more broadly across a range of socio-demographic segments online is a substantial asset. When properly curated, moderated and blended with offline consultation, ‘e-participation’ exposes citizens to new ideas and insights, right the way through to giving a platform for civic leadership able to inspire action and drive behaviour change.

Ferro & Molinari, e-ladder of Participation (2010)

Since 2010, the tools and platforms cited in the e-participation ladder have undoubtedly moved on. Unrecognisable even; but the segment behaviours seem to have held relatively true. Today, beyond Facebook and twitter, specialised engagement platforms like CitizenLab, Engage Citizen, bang the table and more are harnessing the same online participation pipeline to source ideas, define citizen priorities and shape collective action in an increasingly productive and effective way.

An additional consideration for academics and experts is social inclusion. Waves of iimmigration, illegal behaviour, unemployment, different cultures and social habits are a source of problems in most cities. Citizen engagement is both a fundamental and interesting technique to address this issue; and also potentially weakened or even undermined by it. These elements are addressed in more detail in the segmentation section of this part of the report.



Moving away from the academic expert roots to the ‘practitioner’ experts and local government leaders in citizen engagement is a young but emerging competence. A body of knowledge is developing with the input of academics; but also non-governmental organisations, institutions, associations, open data advocates, technology platform developers, living labs, digital incubators, alliances of like-minded practitioners, private companies and more. These can vary in scope and reach from hyper-local, entrepreneurial and informal ‘Meet Up’ groups on civic tech and engagement to ‘action clusters’ of the European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP-SCC), which shapes formal proposals and directives at the European policy level.

With the objective of building best practice and capacity – here are a selection of resources for REMOURBAN to consider from some such organisations:

1.3.1 International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) The most widely acknowledged framework among these different groups is the one from which REMOURBAN has taken so heavily, the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2):

IAP2 ‘Spectrum of public participation’

IAP2 was founded in 1990 in response to a growing interest in the field and defines itself as ‘an international association of members who seek to promote and improve the practice of public participation in relation to individuals, governments, institutions, and other entities that affect the public interest in nations throughout the world’.

The full spectrum, core values, and toolbox are excellent resources for REMOURBAN’s mission to turn citizens from passive to active – making them actors in the urban regeneration model. Especially valuable is the pragmatic and concise advise for each engagement channel or technique. ‘Always think it through’, ‘What can go right’ and ‘What can go wrong’ are universally appreciated words of advice. The full spectrum also outlines ‘goals’ and ‘promises’ associated to the level of engagement sort after.

IAP2 Public Participation Toolbox



1.3.2 European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP-SCC)

The European Innovation Partnership on Smart Cities and Communities (EIP-SCC) has conducted some excellent work to frame, share and advance the work of citizen engagement in smart cities through the ‘Citizen Focus’ action cluster.

For the action cluster – compiled of experts, practitioners and interested parties from around Europe - “‘Citizen Focus’ is about industries, civil society, and different layers of government working together with citizens to realize public interests at the intersection of ICT, mobility and energy in an urban environment.”

The mission they have set themselves is to amplify the positive signs and initiatives bubbling away to build a more relevant and structured approach for smart cities. The most relevant approaches are both statements REMOURBAN can quickly identify with and align their actions:

• Projects that create an enabling environment for citizens to solve the problems they identify. Additionally, projects that help the most successful citizen-led projects scale – in a city or internationally.

• Projects that facilitate a conversation between stakeholders, where citizens’ voices are not only heard, but instrumental in solution design, allowing for better results and creating faster and more targeted improvements

A number of excellent resources to build case studies detail the citizen focus commitments made, goals, level of maturity (from planning phase to advanced implementation) and outcomes. A complete list of these commitments is available on the EIP-SCC site.



Most practical and full of insight for any smart city project is the smartly titled handbook “Principals and Enablers for Citizen Engagement”, a publication full of hands on advice and insight for getting engagement right. A jointly presented webinar also gave personal testimony to the content and can be consulted online. Specific reference to each of the ICT, energy and mobility sectors as well as city-specific themes such as social inclusion, make this work indispensible for REMOURBAN. The cluster is also very attentive to a topic not treated in detail in this report: data and privacy. A holistic issue for smart cities, topic with mixed perception by citizens, and potential ‘trust-breaker’ if not properly attended to.

The on-going work should also be critical to building best practice moving forward. Especially the setting up and agreement on the EIP high-level qualitative and quantitative targets. The cluster has established 2020 as a deadline to provide inputs regarding qualitative targets, leaving time for initiatives to continue working and a broad, effective consensus to emerge.

With REMOURBAN work to define indicators, horizontal initiative CITYKEYS and general demand to be able to collect data, measure and evaluate with precision – the fact that the EIP-SCC cluster are not yet ready to define clear and functioning indicators for citizen engagement is both reassuring and revealing. This report has already attempted to reference in more detail practices to evaluate engagement and social acceptance and further evaluation criteria – according to the scope and objectives of each strategy – are developed in D3.15, Citizen Engagement strategies for each city. (ST1.3.2)

Three thematic initiatives of the action cluster will no doubt provide more resources and insight along with concrete targets. They are:

• Start from existing habits and identify the needs

• A citizen-centric approach to data; and

• Citizen and stakeholders communication platforms

REMOURBAN continues to follow these initiatives and the development of any indicators closely and will feedback to the action cluster about experiences in this area, including a range of surveys collected as part of this report.



Extract of EIP-SCC handbook

1.3.3 Citizen Driven Innovation: World Bank and Living Labs Citizen Driven Innovation is a coproduction of two organisations well versed in the art of engagement and collaboration, the World Bank and European Network of Living Labs (ENoLL). Conceived primarily as a guidebook for city mayors and public administrators, it also addresses the range of players and ‘change-makers’ collectively changing the perception and place of citizen engagement in decision making.

It is a particularly interesting resource for REMOURBAN because of its international inputs, thoughtful structure innovation driven focus – both in terms of policy as well as competivity, business and skills. Both organisations are interesting to discover further in the quest to develop a model for citizen’s engagement and explore European and international best practices.

The World Bank is a mature and long-standing advocate of engaging with citizen’s for improved results and merits consideration by REMOURBAN. As part of their strategy review in 2013-14, a wholesale framework for mainstreaming citizen engagement across its operations took place, creating a ‘strategic framework’ and advisory council to this effect. More recently, they have even taken to delivering Mass Online Open Courses (MOOC’s) on its benefit for development aid impact and worked closely with the Open Government Partnership – dedicated to making governments more open, accountable, and responsive to citizens.

For this powerful institution, dedicated to improving lives sustainably, they are convinced that under the right conditions, citizen engagement can help governments achieve improved development results. Their framework includes a comprehensive review of existing literature, which finds positive links between citizen engagement and improved public service delivery, public financial management, governance and social inclusion and empowerment. They are cautious, however, to advise that the outcomes of citizen engagement are highly context specific and sensitive to government and citizens’ capacity and willingness to engage. Other factors for success cited can also be equally pertinent for REMOURBAN, including social, political, economic, environmental, cultural, geographic and other factors, such as gender dynamics.

Good to know: Identified good practice principals from EIP-SCC Citizen Focus:

Simple | Aim to facilitate understanding and usage

Reciprocal | ‘Give for getting’ to create fair and lasting relationships

Participative, balanced, representative | Understand benefits and limits of approaches

Inclusiveness | Ensure solutions that are representative of the whole population

Push approach not pull | Go where people are instead of assuming they will come to you

Online – Offline balanced interventions | Understand benefits and limits of different settings

Conscious of privacy and rights | Build trust from the start

Conscious of citizens’ emotions | Understand the feelings that flow on or under the surface

Change-enablers with city stakeholders | Make the municipality a partner

Wallet-savvy | Use citizens’ own funds in smart ways that benefit citizens



A living lab has its roots as a research concept, in ICT and usability testing. Today, they represent a collaborative, user-centred, open-innovation ecosystem fueled by collectively created ideas, content and applications. Focused on citizen-centric innovation, living lab’s helps to prototype ideas, concepts, products, services and processes in a highly decentralized manner.

This approach has, in their own words been particularly useful in exploring the concept of smart cities, used to ‘mobilize resources to respond to urban innovation challenges in a variety of situations, objectives and governance structures’. The principals of ‘open and agile’ processes and project management are liberally applied to issues of co-production, interoperability and open data through the sister initiative Connected Smart Cities Network which represents 75 cities in 15 countries. The living lab structures are very strong on Internet based technologies but certainly also extends to manage smart city conundrums of maps and data, sensors, technology and market readiness for example.

Living Labs: citizen driven innovation with a focus to tackle smart city ‘dilemmas’

Back to the best practices explored by the two organisations – it provides readers and REMOURBAN with a mix of international case studies, emphasising the need for experimentation with multiple methodologies rather than a model. Experimentation between city administrators, citizens and key stakeholders, based on some central tenants.

Freedom within a framework: ‘Citizen Driven Innovation’ handbook building blocks



The authors helpfully breakdown each of the blocks illustrated with a description, context and challenge; before exploring the actions, results, impacts and scalability of the initiative. Further into the guide, technology paradigms often encountered by living labs give good insight into how this framework can help tackle the Internet of Things, cloud computing and open data.

This is no doubt useful for REMOURBAN in the development of a model of citizen engagement; but even more so are the trio of methodologies in the living lab approach:

• Idea generation: processes to explore possibilities in a multi-disciplinary group with the goal of producing and communicating concrete results

ü Generates long-term collaboration ü Clear and tested structure

• Co-design: user-centered processes ensuring equal footing and active participation

across all stakeholders ü Ensures professional support ü Achieves political commitment

• Service design: developing new ICT based products or services framed by a clear

innovation goal ü Illustrative scenarios and techniques give user-focus ü Requires long-term commitment; but potentially delivers the most effective and

sustainable return

Their individual efforts in citizen engagement and Memorandum of Understanding that joins these two organisations with undoubtedly continue to produce and even set the bar for best practices in Europe and beyond. The mix of case studies and guidance laid out can help REMOURBAN along their paths of build trust, test collaboration, incorporate and experiment with technology and cultivate champions. Even for these expert organisations though, they consciously sign off “This is just the beginning of the journey”.

1.3.4 Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning Mobility services must be responsive to the city and citizens around them and as a consequence a strong heritage of public consultation and engagement. This can be defining or re-shaping bus routes, responding to changes in urban density and demographics, designing flagship light rail and tramway systems or changing travel patterns and behaviour. Transit authorities often also count cyclists and pedestrians as in their mobility charge as well and conduct lengthy consultations and interact with numerous advocacy groups on the environment and urban planning.

The mobility services industry is also subject to major changes in use and consumption due to the sharing economy and has been a pioneer in bike and car-sharing schemes, and disruptive new actors in the mobility chain, such as Uber. Elsewhere, mobility providers and transport authorities have been at the fore of using open data and co-creating solutions with citizens – notably in passenger information and gaming to benefit service delivery and passenger comfort

Finally, in common with REMOURBAN and other urban transformation projects, public transport development works can take many years and disturb residents, business and communities with heavy works and replacement services. Smart city leaders may want to collaborate with and learn from their transportation colleagues.

The European Union platform, CIVITAS, identified case studies from across the continent of citizen engagement in mobility, but do not propose a framework or methodology. One element



CIVITAS does highlight very clearly though is that participatory culture and strong political support are preconditions for successful citizen engagement. “If politicians are committed and if they support a dialogue with citizens, this creates the necessary trust among citizens that their voices will be heard, and they are more motivated to participate” they say. The ELTIS urban mobility observatory also keeps a range of updated initiatives catalogued.

The EU project GUIDEMAPS did look in more detail at decision-making and engagement in the transport planning in Europe and although dating to 2004, gives some excellent insight into stakeholder engagement and decision-making, based on research at 16 sites in 10 European countries, culminated in their final report.

Generally and partially acceptable tools along the decision-making process:

The project’s segmentation of types of audience, stage of the project, type of initiative and timing, cross referenced with citizen and stakeholder engagement tools is potentially a format for REMOURBAN style projects to consider.

Across the Atlantic, the US Department of Transport has issued a framework, which is detailed below. Interestingly, this is part of the American president’s ‘Open Government Initiative’ and its efforts to change the way federal agencies conduct business and engage with the public.

US Department of Transport Open Government framework



1.3.5 Urban and Community Planning Architects and planning have, perhaps, the longest history of citizen participation and are another good source of resources and experience. Planners have regularly use ‘Charettes’ to bring together citizen and stakeholder groups with a team design professionals and other experts in intense, creative work sessions over a short time period. These are used to kick-start a design process as well as help participants visualize alternatives and to recommend design solutions.

Planning, architecture and facilities development – in both urban and rural contexts – can also evoke strong reactions and powerful vocal minorities. This is particularly concerning ‘Not In My Back Yard’ (NIMBY) planning issues, such as wind turbines, waste facilities, power generation plants, housing developments and such. In this vein, some useful resources and experiences in handing emotions and conflicts in public meetings have also been generated that could serve REMOURBAN and smart city projects.

Six Strategic Planning Choices to mandate citizen participation were identified in a 2003 paperxiii:

1. Administration: whether to prepare a participation plan and how to staff citizen involvement efforts;

2. Objectives: whether to educate citizens, seek their preferences, or grant them influence; 3. Stage: when to start encouraging citizen involvement in the planning process; 4. Targeting: which types of stakeholder groups to include in participation efforts; 5. Techniques: what types of participation approaches to employ; and 6. Information: which types of information and dissemination processes to incorporate

participation activities

Elsewhere, community planning techniques are being evolved and applied in a range of environments, harnessing the active participation of end users of buildings, transport services and urban regeneration to name a few. An internationally recognised resource, run by Nick Wates Associates, author of The Community Planning Handbook is CommunityPlanning.net.

Amongst an almost endless set of excellent resources detailing principals, methods, scenarios and toolbox, a ‘participation matrix’ detailing project stages and level of community involvement is proposed.

Illustration of how different levels of participation is appropriate at different stages of a project:



1.3.6 Selected additional frameworks and resources There are a number of models, frameworks and matrix concerning civic and citizen participation, volunteering and planning. A few, hopefully relevant, have been explored here that may be relevant to REMOURBAN, but there are many, many more.

The following selection of frameworks, publications and resources may be worth exploring for all actors considering applying citizen engagement techniques in a smart city context. There are certainly numerous other initiatives and resources – above all in national languages, such as the national commission for public debate in France, Balkan Assist, the German local direct democracy database and Denmarks MindLab,

The Change Handbook

Over 60 processes and methods in change and engagement explored

Citizens Energy Forum

Annual forum discussing energy consumer empowerment, roll-out of smart meters, self-generation, consumer vulnerability and energy poverty

CommunityPlanning.net

Extensive resources in community planning and urban environment

ECAS

EU Resource Centre on citizens’ rights and campaigners for an inclusive, transparent and democratic Europe

GovLab

New findings and developments on innovation in government

INVOLVE

UK expert organisation in public participation and democracy

Participation Compass

Practical information for those working to involve people

ParticipateDB

Collaborative catalogue for online tools for participation and digital engagement

Participedia

Home to the global community of democracy researchers, practitioners and interested citizens

A more complete list of engagement and participation frameworks, entitled a chase through the maze of participation models, frameworks & theories is explored – particularly from a youth engagement angle – on Nonformality:

• 1969 Ladder of citizen participation Sherry Arnstein • 1992 Ladder of children participation Roger Hart • 1996 Typology of participation Sarah White • 1997 Degrees of participation Phil Treseder • 1998 Wheel of participation Scott Davidson • 2000 Spectrum of public participation IAP2 [latest version from 2007] • 2001 Active participation framework OECD



• 2001 Pathways to participation Harry Shier • 2001 Clarity model of participation Clare Lardner • 2001 Strategic approach to participation UNICEF • 2002 Triangle of youth participation Jans & de Backer • 2002 Dimensions of youth participation David Driskell • 2002 Seven realms of participation Francis & Lorenzo • 2003 Ladder of volunteer participation Adam Fletcher • 2003 Youth engagement continuum FCYO • 2006 Four Cs of online participation Derek Wenmoth • 2006 Power law of participation Ross Mayfield

Ross Mayfield’s Power law of participation, 2006

• 2006 Levels, spaces and forms of power John Gaventa • 2006 The CLEAR Participation Model Lawndes & Pratchett • 2006 Four L Engagement Model Tony Karrer • 2007 Participation 2.0 Model New Zealand • 2007 Spectrum of public participation IAP2 [first version from 2000, see comments below] • 2007 Engagement in the policy cycle Diane Warburton • 2007 Online Participation Behaviour Chain Fogg & Eckles • 2009 Key dimensions of participation Driskell & Neema • 2009 Matrix of participation Tim Davies • 2009 Pathways through participation NCVO & IVR • 2010 Changing views on participation Pedro Martín • 2010 Ladder of online participation Bernoff & Li • 2010 Online participation across age Rick Wicklin • 2010 Three-lens approach to participation DFID-CSO • 2010 Behavior Grid BJ Fogg • 2010 The Participation Tree Harry Shier • 2011 Typology of Youth Participation Wong et al. • 2011 Six principles of online participation Tim Davies • 2012 The Yinyang Model Shier et al.



Citizens as consumers? Tensions and opportunities 1.4

It is increasingly common to hear that smart cities need smart citizens. Does that mean smart in the way a customer searches peer-to-peer reviews, price match websites and buys online with a discount code? Or does that mean smart as in aware of the issues around them like climate change or community cohesion and willing to participate, act, mobilize themselves and others to contribute to a common good?

There is certainly a tension between the two; but undoubtedly, citizen’s expectations and interactions are being strongly shaped by their consumer experience, which in turn is shaping interactions with local government and their urban environment.

Futures company sustainability reportxiv

If there is a tension between the sense of purpose and underlying motivations, then there is also a tension between delivery expectations and experiences. For instance, when interacting with a brand on social media 30% of twitter users expect a response in 30 minutes, 22% in two hours and a further 29% the same day. That’s a massive 81% expecting direct and satisfactory response and resolution. Not what they may expect from a residents or planning committee.

A consumer purchase is also often an emotional, pleasurable and rewarding experience. This is being further extended with novel experiential marketing techniques, immersive digital content and unique products customers can personalise and create themselves, like NikeID.

Potential differences of experience between consumers and citizens

Consumer experience Citizen experience

Instant access Imposed access

24/7 Limited hours

Online Paper-based

Mobile Travel-to

Highly personalised Never personal

Fast delivery Long waits

Alternative choices Sole service provider

REMOURBAN and others can perhaps learn about segmentation, messaging and marketing from the consumer space. High performing businesses and brands understand people,



spending significant money in surveys, trend reports and focus groups to anticipate and respond to desires and needs. For instance, when considering a consumers awareness of social and environmental issues, brands explore why an individual makes a ‘feel good’ choice, a ‘better’ choice or a ‘different’ choice for the good of the environment for example. Importantly, they also explore what shapes or defines each choice and adapts their product and marketing accordingly.

The best brands master the ‘Nudge’ techniques, the ‘up-sell’, ‘cross-sell’ and build value, content and incentives that encourage it. Not all of this need to be viewed by city leaders and agencies as dirty words and concepts devoid of purpose. Indeed, the savviest local authorities are already changing citizen behaviour and interactions using many of them. ‘Activating’ consumers is also a technique already explored in this report; but the commercial space is very good at accelerating innovation or product adoption by fine-tuning the social epidemic curve. Special rewards and messaging are developed for each group.

Ideation/Validation/Amplification: creation of ambassadors in the commercial space:

Social media is also now deeply embedded in most consumer businesses, where it is used to facilitate conversation; share insight and content; connect and collaborate; redistribute influence and discover new opportunities. This mind-set in action is proving highly productive for far more engaging for both the business and its customers. They are also harnessing the ‘Trust Economy’ which is at the heart of peer-to-peer review – embedded into most consumer goods sites and website like TripAdvisor – and disruptive challengers like Uber and AirBnB. For example, according to Nielsen, 83% of people trust recommendations from people they know, 66% trust a consumer opinion online. And a professor or person you like is twice as likely to be trustedxv.

Finally, companies are becoming adept at using crowdsourcing and co-creation to improve products and services. The original and powerful case study is Dell Ideastorm, a consumer driven online initiative. Today, they can boast 24,000 ideas submitted, 750,000 votes, 100,000 comments and 550 product ideas implemented as a result. Most of these ideas have been incremental improvements, but some have been substantial successes with major cost savings or increased sales as a result.

Consumer insight, use of technology, product development might not all be wholesale transferable, but the lines are becoming more blurred – and largely to the benefit of citizen engagement, trust and transparency. If these can inspire the ‘feel good’ choices and more for consumers, then they can also be applied to encourage the ‘better choices’ of citizens.



2 Conclusions

This report has sought to explore new strategies in citizen engagement and empowerment looking both internally to map REMOURBAN cities’ actions but also externally to explore further factors and frameworks to structure these findings.

Our objective has been to demonstrate the principals, tools, methods and techniques to inform citizens, motivate individuals and communities to act responsibly, be proactive, participate or even co-create their urban environment.

Local authorities, agencies, organisations and citizens taking such a course have numerous direct and indirect benefits. From generating trust in local governance; driving adoption of new technology; incremental and substantial behaviour change; to building marketable skills and competitive business in an open innovation economy.

The digital consumer and Internet age has accelerated the interactions and expectations to a new level. The opportunities are inspiring and new ways to break down barriers, share and inspire are evolving. Certainly these are also opportunities to be grasped by REMOURBAN and other smart cities projects. However, a particular challenge is inherent to turning citizens from passive persons into active actors of the sustainable renovation of the city they live in. The physical.

Creating a smart, sustainable urban transformation can be a long road, full of deep renovation, community disturbance and substantial public and personal investment – both time and finance. With the multiple challenges of shaping minds, urban spaces and our planets’ sustainable future, the need for profound and meaningful engagement is even greater.

In 1969, the celebrated urban planner, Jane Jacobs wrote “cities have the capacity of providing something for everyone. Only because, and when, they are created by everyone”. It remains true today and eludes the single most important concept of citizen engagement. A concept not yet said strongly enough – any initiative must meet the criteria of shared decision making. Otherwise its just communications.

Citizens demand a voice and a ‘say’ about what happens

Processes by which public concerns, perspectives, needs and values are incorporated into decision-making”

Processes through which, citizens – at some stage of the process and development – find themselves on equal footing as the person ‘in power’.



Beyond the central caveat of devolving control at some point of the process as part of a partnership or collaboration with citizens, there is much to material to inspire and resources to use in citizen engagement.

In practical practitioner terms, the vast array of frameworks, tools and methodologies has been touched upon in this report. The final model for successful citizen engagement? It appears, ‘freedom within a framework’ is, today, the way to reconcile a growing but relatively immature body of knowledge with the unique ingredients of project, place, people, culture and context.

Choosing from the menu of options available and deciding on which initiatives correspond best to a particular REMOURBAN or smart city development should be the result of internal discussion, mapping and analysis as well as considerations of financial, staffing and time resources and constraints. A suggestion in this conclusion is to conduct such an exercise and focus on developing competence, expertise and credibility over time in a refined selection of outreach and engagement techniques.

Mapping the citizen engagement tools according to local resources, risk and complexity could be an exercise conducted using this schema from Les Robinson, 2002xvi

Finally, in practitioner terms, REMOURBAN is inspired by other organisations and institutions that have chosen to assimilate and share their knowledge as a key set of principals and enabling steps for citizen engagement. These were established during the course of this report and are:



REMOURBAN

Selected Principles and Enablers for Citizen Engagement

Following a review of contemporary practitioner sources and resources, REMOURBAN proposes some central tenants to be considered in more detail for the project

ü Be prepared to spend time and money

Transforming a citizen or community dynamic from apathy to engagement or suspicion to trust is a time-consuming journey. One that needs to be approached with sincerity and even a certain amount of skill, both on and offline. Shortcuts are few and successful engagement requires resources as well as political and personal will.

ü Plan carefully and with transparency

What is the scope of the project and what will it change or achieve? Upon what will citizens be able to decide, how and when? How are opinions received, treated and acted on? Is feedback given regularly and widely shared? How will citizen’s online data, ideas and opinions be managed? Citizens have to overcome a number of barriers to bring real value to the process. Make it easy for them to navigate with clear signposts and robust processes.

ü Ensure you have internal buy-in and political commitment

Beyond the buzzwords and quotes, is there a broad consensus and understanding of the long-term benefits and need to use citizen engagement? Is the local authority and its partners prepared to loose control at some point, embrace new and potentially time-consuming processes that could be derailed or refused? Are true actions up for mutual debate and discussion? It can be a culture shock, so make sure people are on-board.

ü Mix tools, methods and messages

One size certainly does not fit all – and ways to engage are the same. Decide how you want to interact and engage. Cross-reference with the goals and scope of the project before deciding on a mix of initiatives to achieve it. Perhaps an online tool with rich content and proactive facilitation can be a backbone; but more vocal and interested members of the community will give a great deal more input at a co-creation workshop.

ü Understand civic assets and attitudes

Before any journey, assess the terrain. How big is the mountain to climb? Are there friends and resources along the way? Knowing the density, level of activity and maturity of associations and social organisations in a district, mapping social ‘connector points’ for the community such as schools, places of worship, healthcare centres and the like is precious. Equip yourself with voter turnout, levels of unemployment and literacy, crime rates and aggregating opinion and sentiment online and in local media

ü Clarity and simplicity

Well before, during and after any proposed works or citizen engagement initiative, leave the bureaucratic babble behind! Tone and languages is important in bridging the distance between administration and citizen. Equally, use visual tools and aids where possible. Info graphics, maps, visualisations and models are to be privileged over reams of text.

ü Plan the promotion

In order to first participate, citizens must first be aware of the possibility. How will people hear about your initiative and who will tell them are critical to making a good first impression. Consider market research and analysis to find our where your target audiences gets their



information and be aware of literacy and numeracy levels in your target audience. If resourcing levels will allow face-to-face interaction, online moderation can facilitate the task.

ü Work on location

‘Real people in real locations’ rather than convening a meeting in an unknown venue, with probably unknown travel plans, inconvenient times of day for some. Rather solicit a citizen on their terms and align with their choices, at a shopping centre, a school, a market and more. Use multiple locations to target a range of segments, demographics and backgrounds. Apply the same desire to meet on their turf online.

ü Put yourself in my shoes

Compromise, consensus and common ground each have a role to play in our decision-making activities. Cultivate a deeper understanding and appreciation for the position and constraints of each other with simulation games, role-playing exercises, citizen juries and more. Mutual understanding creates possibilities for complementary action.

ü Assure feedback

Tell the community how their thoughts will be used and when and how you will get back to them. Share what changed and how citizens and the community shaped it with regular, transparent feedback. Translating small, high interest groups into wide-scale mobilisation and networks is fuelled by information and pace of delivery. Consider sharing more detailed insights according to segments and demographics. Breaking with bureaucratic tradition can reap reward to accelerate engagement

ü Inclusive, inventive and accessible on & offline

Diversity is strength in engagement. It can bring additional quality and quantity of ideas; but also credibility and legitimacy to initiatives. Although technology is the overwhelming driver, different approaches are needed to address citizens’ various needs - including the technophobic. Be respectful of the socio-demographic, linguistic and cultural diversity of a community, addressing a wide range of ages, status, incomes and ethnicities both on and offline.

ü What’s in it for me? Quality information, benefits, incentives, entertainment, recognition, reward – or just the pleasure of sharing or getting something done. Just some of the reasons citizens make the choice to engage, stay motivated to do so, and encourage others to do the same. Tap into the aspirations and interests of your audience as well as your practical constraints and budgets to be creative in this aspect.

ü Define and measure success

Citizen engagement success treads the line between key performance and key behaviour indicators anchored deep in a community’s social fabric. In practical terms measures in audience size, interaction, participation and satisfaction must be deployed to reflect the scope and objectives of the specific initiative. Explore connection with broader economic, skills and civic goals whenever possible.

ü Find your citizens’ voice and champions

Delivering urban transformation is a team exercise. Moving from core group, to early adopters and making the leap to establish social proof may have its language roots in product innovation; but reaching a ‘tipping point’ is critical in any domain. Recognise the players, steps and language needed to spread awareness and create engagement. Initial community discussions and tactics may be complex. Adapt messaging, delivery and decision-making power accordingly once the initiative gains momentum amongst the many.



Looking further ahead to anticipate the evolution of citizen engagement and prepared, REMOURBAN offers some key trends to consider, supported by expert testimonial:

• Innovative governance New devolved structures are better-trusted, more productive forums for discussion, engagement, outcomes and results… See: Open Governance, Energy Transition networks, Community led groups

“Confrontation should be real, honest and useful, creative, constructive and productive. It should be continuous; that is, incorporated in the normal operations of institutions. This presupposes abandoning any top-down approach: another kind of public leadership, more developed and distributed.”

Ramon Canal Oliveras

Autonomous University of Barcelona

Cities realize that they are vulnerable if managed purely from political and economical perspective. Local self-sufficiency through cohesion is level 4 city development, an eco-system, a “sustainocracy”.

Jean-Paul Close STIR Foundation & AiREAS

• Technology driven Open data, open-innovation economy, emerging production techniques… See: LivingLabs, FabLabs, Hackathons, Internet of Things (IoT)

“Driven by the potentials of mobile communication and IoT, citizens will take more and more the lead of ICT design and adaptation, and this will increase dramatically in future generations as coding skills will become the basic grammar of everyday life and communication”

Maria Sanguilliano

ECWT (European Centre for Women and Technology) and EIP SCC Citizen Focus Action Cluster

“Open innovation is already a reality: people discuss opportunities, create solutions, show their solutions in crowdsourcing, others buy those solutions before being produced. Such platforms fuel production as proper living labs. The economy is being shaped by open innovation and people is largely adopting such paradigm”

Jorge Savria, EngageCitizen



• Socially beneficial Civil society and other sectors able to quickly mobilise around new issues and ideas once people already aware and engaged… See: OpenIDEO, Hackwithrefugees

#hackwithrefugees

Under the right stimulus citizens become productive innovators who add value to the city's core values and development. Real smart cities are co-creations with their citizens.

Jean-Paul Close STIR Foundation & AiREAS

• More mature, embedded, citizen engagement Focused use, better evaluation techniques, improved delivery, understanding of how trust gained, exploring values, views and subsequent behaviours, better identification of barriers See: REMOURBAN

“(Deeper citizen engagement) Increases acceptance of new projects and services and maximizes necessary behavioural change. It helps city create and manage innovation; creates new skills Involves in a more equal base all stakeholders that matter: city, citizens, academia, private sector”

Nikolaos Kontinakis,

EuroCities

“In the future, citizen engagement will turn into a normal process and there will be no need to talk about it”

Mario Conci,

Trento Rise



Citizen engagement in the REMOURBAN Model 2.1

The REMOURBAN city audits have provided a foundation for this report: mapping and selecting innovative practices to replicate elsewhere.

This deliverable D1.16, ‘Report on Innovative Citizen Engagement Strategies’ is part of the action design process and conducted in parallel with D3.15 ‘Citizen Engagement Strategies for each city’. While these two activities have been conducted in parallel, a webinar to facilitate knowledge sharing of citizen engagement from across the project and international principals. This was conducted on 10 November 2015 and designed to inspire the implementation strategies in work package three of the project. Further deliverables D3.17 and D3.18 will update and evolve citizen engagement strategies in each city, contributing to a successful assessment and evaluation of social acceptance in D4.17.

Figure 1: Sustainable Urban Regeneration Model

When it comes to the citizen engagement strategies in D3.15, the following key issues have been proposed in order to identify and implement a sound proposal and set of actions:

• What? (Actions: energy, mobility, ICTs) What key priority areas is the message for? What is that message? (e.g. your buildings will be retrofitted, you will pay xx€, you will save xx€ and buildings will look like this; or, the city will implement a new e-bus line). Is this negotiable? Are citizens going to be engaged or just informed?

• When? (Temporal goals) Will citizens be engaged from the auditing phase? Will their opinions be considered during the design? And during the assessment, will they be asked for the social acceptance and spread the word about the results?

• Who and how? (Management) Who sends the message, who the message intended for and how is it transmitted? Communication channels, methods and tools to be selected and deployed appropriately (e.g. the Municipality launches a digital survey to the inhabitants to collect their needs regarding public transport).

• What are the benefits? (Evaluation) Has the communication been efficient? Which are benefits have been generated by the strategy? Have citizens participated in a collaborative manner? Haver they actually been engaged?

• Which are the resources? (Finance) What is the cost (not only economic, also in terms of efforts) of implementing the strategy?



3 References

i Inspired by Remourban Description of Action ii Involving Citizens in Community Decision Making: A Guidebook, Creighton, J.L (1992) iii Estaban Kolsky, The two loyalty models compared in a nutshell iv Also know as Citizen Initiative Review v Carayannis et al. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2012 vi Leading Cities, Co-Creating Leading Cities, ‘Definition of Co-Creation as a means of citizen engagement’ vii Bang the Table : 100 ideas to engage your community online viii BAAM ! in Milan, Italy is one such initiative ix Knight Foundation, Emergence of Civic Tech x Bull, R., Petts, J., & Evans, J. (2010). The importance of context for effective public engagement: Learning from the governance of waste. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 53 (8): 991-1009 xi Thanks to Maria Sangiuliano of EIP-SCC Citizen Focus action cluster for the suggestions xii FerroE, MolinariF. Framing Web2.0 in the process of public sector innovation: going down the participation ladder. Eur J ePractice 2010:9. xiii Samuel D. Brody, David R. Godschalk, Raymond J. Burby, ‘Mandating Citizen Participation in Plan Making, Six Strategic Planing Choices’ xiv How to Sustain Sustainability xv Edelman Trust Barometer 2013-15 xvi Enabling Change

Citizen Engagement in Smart Cities

Government & Nonprofit

Transcript of Citizen Engagement in Smart Cities